From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Currie v. State

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
May 31, 2017
219 So. 3d 960 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

Summary

holding that a defendant sentenced to life in prison for a sexual battery committed when he was a juvenile was not entitled to relief pursuant to Graham where he was released on parole when he was 25 years old and was then reincarcerated, and where the Commission on Offender Review has assigned him a presumptive parole release date, as the defendant was afforded a meaningful opportunity to obtain release

Summary of this case from Wright v. State

Opinion

CASE NO. 1D16–5578

05-31-2017

Jack Thomas CURRIE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Jack Thomas Currie, pro se, Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Jack Thomas Currie, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant has filed a rule 3.800(a) motion in which he argues that because he was a juvenile when he committed the offense of sexual battery with a firearm and received a life sentence with the possibility of parole, he is entitled to be resentenced pursuant to Atwell v. State , 197 So.3d 1040 (Fla. 2016), and Henry v. State , 175 So.3d 675 (Fla. 2015). We disagree. Appellant was afforded a meaningful opportunity to obtain release and, in fact, was released on parole when he was 25 years old. He then violated parole and was reincarcerated. The Florida Commission on Offender Review has assigned him a presumptive parole release date, and he continues to be considered for release on parole. We therefore conclude he is not entitled to be resentenced because he has not received the functional equivalent of a life sentence. He has already been released once, and he has the potential to be released again. Thomas v. State , 78 So.3d 644, 646 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (discussing that while some sentences "may become the functional equivalent of a life sentence, we do not believe that situation has occurred in the instant case").

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, RAY, and BILBREY, JJ., CONCUR.


Summaries of

Currie v. State

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
May 31, 2017
219 So. 3d 960 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

holding that a defendant sentenced to life in prison for a sexual battery committed when he was a juvenile was not entitled to relief pursuant to Graham where he was released on parole when he was 25 years old and was then reincarcerated, and where the Commission on Offender Review has assigned him a presumptive parole release date, as the defendant was afforded a meaningful opportunity to obtain release

Summary of this case from Wright v. State

reaching a similar conclusion for different reasons

Summary of this case from Rogers v. State
Case details for

Currie v. State

Case Details

Full title:JACK THOMAS CURRIE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

Court:DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

Date published: May 31, 2017

Citations

219 So. 3d 960 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

Citing Cases

Rogers v. State

The trial court granted Simmons’ motion and ordered resentencing. But before resentencing occurred, this…

Wright v. State

Here, the appellant has failed to allege that he has never been released on parole and that he has no…